COM 0500.001 1996-1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

J.j!. ~ict..iy Limited: G'~angtng an Economy by Changing its Public Sector ~ Page 13 • there were confused col...lercial, social and political object,,~s; • there were conflicts of interest over roles; • there was no real accountability by politicians or their managers; • no useful information was available on the performance of these "departmental businesses"; • there was significant "crowding out" of other providers through subsidies and regulation; and • management incentives were to grow big, not to innovate. Philosophy behind public sector management reforms Any Government has an interest in the performance of its departments and agencies - • as owner (it should expect a proper return on its investment); and • as a purchaser of government goods and services (it should expect quality goods and services at the best price). Outcomes, outputs and inputs Much of the reform process focussed on a clearer understanding of inputs as opposed to departmental outcomes and outputs - • Inputs represented the resources used by Government Departments to produce outputs, being, in essence, the cash cost of items such as personnel, materials, supplies and services and other operating expenses, together with capital expenditure, transfers and loans. • Outcomes represent the benefits sought by the Government (both strategic and operational benefits). • Outputs represent the goods and services produced by Government Departments. These are the goods and services (specified in terms of quantity, quality, cost and time) that Ministers acquire from departments in order to achieve the desired outcomes. Outputs are used to allocate resources and as a basis to measure performance. Producing an agreed level and quality of outputs, within agreed timeframes and costs, is the responsibility of the Chief Executive, and is reported annually